在我国司法实践中，存在部分行为人自愿脱离共犯关系、停止犯罪行为或者对于防止犯罪结果的发生付出了一定程度真挚努力的情况。因为此类行为人通常未能成功阻止犯罪结果的发生，所以无法成立中止犯，但根据"一人既遂，全部既遂”的原则认定其为既遂犯又显得苛刻，无法达到鼓励行为人停止犯罪、脱离共犯关系的目的，也无法达到为脱离共犯关系的行为人架设“返回的黄金桥”的目的。因此，原属日本刑法理论的共犯脱离理论应运而生，旨在弥补现有共犯处罚理论的不足。依据该理论，结合司法实践，可总结出脱离犯的特殊形态，这是与共犯论以及未完成形态理论有所联系和区分的特殊形态，强调的是从共犯关系中脱离出的行为人，实际脱离犯的成立阶段不局限于着手后既遂前的阶段。通过对脱离犯进行概念分析和理论定位以及罪责梯度的研究，可以有效解决司法实践中存在的问题，并完善犯罪论体系。

确立脱离犯的概念需要引入共犯脱离理论，其引入具有必要性与可行性，在评析学说的过程中把重点放在共犯脱离理论的本质定位上，使得脱离犯的判断基准和价值衡量独立于中止犯、未遂犯以及既遂犯而存在。从主观和客观两方面去确定脱离犯的成立，随后在确定成立脱离犯的基础上讨论不同情况下脱离犯的罪责问题，注重对于因果性和共犯性的双重考察，全方位综合考量共同正犯、教唆犯、帮助犯等的脱离问题。借鉴域外理论和实践情况，在现有的刑法规定上分情况分阶段进行解释分析认定，构建脱离犯的罪刑阶梯。

文章的主体内容由以下章节组成：

第一章主要从司法实践入手，通过分析案例的总体情况和特殊情况，引出我国共犯处罚中脱离行为的治理难题，阐明我国司法实践中客观出现的共犯脱离现象，但又因理论的不足和依据的缺失，存在判例立场迥异的问题。无论是定性还是量刑，都存在一定争议。由此进一步分析，共犯关系的脱离不同于既遂、未遂或中止，其具有独立的理论品格，脱离犯需要独立的判断基准，且有必要对脱离犯进行明确的定义。

第二章重点分析了我国现有的共犯关系脱离理论的各种争议，包括理论定位之争等。最终得出结论，共犯脱离是不同于犯罪停止形态理论、与共犯论有关联的特殊形态理论，其与共犯中止理论有一定的区别和联系，但共犯中止理论不足以解决共犯脱离的全部问题，尤其脱离犯本身不属于一种停止形态理论。脱离犯的理论争议焦点集中于脱离的时间和条件上，最终通过综合我国现有的理论，在脱离条件标准上可提出新的“共犯关系消减说”的判断标准，来论述脱离犯的成立和罪责问题。

第三章对于共犯关系脱离问题进行了域外考察，通过分析日本的共犯关系脱离理论争议和典型案例，以及分析其他大陆法系国家典型代表德国、英美法系国家典型代表国家的制度与实践，并将重点放在共犯脱离理论提出之国即日本相关理论的分析上，从中得到一定的启示，以资借鉴。

第四章主要分析了在我国确立脱离犯的必要性与可行性。从必要性的角度上分析，因为现有的理论存在空隙，不足以解决全部实际问题，而司法实践标准的明确又需要理论的推动，所以首先肯定共犯脱离理论的引入必要性，肯定在我国确立脱离犯的必要性，此外又不局限于理论，还需具有可行性。不仅要从归责理论的角度进行重新阐述与定位，还要注意确立时与共犯中止理论等共犯相关理论的衔接架构。

第五章主要探讨脱离犯的罪刑梯度，旨在明确脱离犯性质的同时，通过解释论对脱离犯的处理进行分析。通过分析脱离犯的行为以及共犯结果的状态来分析共犯关系消减的程度，通过分情况分阶段的探讨，进而构建出脱离犯的刑罚阶梯，并对此进一步阐述分析。

In our judicial practice, there are some cases in which the perpetrators voluntarily break away from the accomplice relationship and make sincere efforts to prevent the criminal result. They usually can not successfully prevent the outcome of the crime, so can not establish a crime of cessation. However, according to the principle of “One accomplished, all accomplished”, it is considered as a accomplished crime, which is not conducive to evaluating the subjective will of the disengaged person so as to encourage the offender to commit a crime. The goal of the “Golden Bridge of Return” is assumed for the perpetrator who makes withdrawing from the complicity. Therefore, the original Japanese criminal law theory aims to make up for the deficiency of the existing accomplice punishment theory. However, the establishment stage of the actual breakaway offense is not limited to the stage before the completion of the crime, but can abstract the concept of “disengaged criminal” on the basis of the theory of the withdrawing from the complicity, through the analysis of the disengaged criminal’s orientation and judgment benchmark. It could establish the corresponding penalty gradient, so as to solve the problems in judicial practice.

It is necessary and feasible to introduce the withdrawing from the complicity. The judgment of the withdrawing from the complicity should not only stay on the theoretical debate, but also lay emphasis on the essential orientation of the accomplice disengagement theory, so that the disengagement criminal exists independently. For this reason, taking the theory of causality cut-off as the basic stand to judge the condition of disengagement, we should pay attention to the dual examination of causality and complicity. Also, we should pay attention to the examination of arbitrariness, comprehensive consideration of the joint principal offender, abettor and helper-related issues. By using the theory and practice of foreign countries for reference, we can further make the system of criminology perfect.

The main content is full of the following chapters:

The first chapter is mainly from the judicial practice, through the analysis of the overall situation and special circumstances of cases, leads to our accomplice punishment from the governance problem. In our judicial practice, there is an objective phenomenon of withdrawing from complicity, but because of insufficient theory and unclear standards, there are different positions in cases. Whether qualitative or sentencing, there are certain problems. It is further pointed out that the withdrawing from complicity is different from accomplishment, attempt or suspension. Disengaged criminal has independent theoretical character and needs independent standards.

The second chapter focuses on the theory of our existing accomplice relationship.Including the debate on the theoretical orientation, the final conclusion is that, the theory of withdrawing from the complicity is a special form, which is different from the criminal cessation and has differences and relations with the theory of cessation from complicity. The theory of discontinuation of complicity can not solve all the problems of disengagement. In addition to the theoretical positioning and the nature of the argument, the focus of the debate also focuses on the time and conditions of the withdrawing. The final analysis of the various theories concluded that the withdrawing from the complicity can be set up in the beginning or after the beginning. It can be set up for the whole period of time, including the period after the completion. It can be used to determine the cause and effect of the cut-off theory.

The third chapter makes the analysis of the theoretical disputes and typical cases of the representative system of other mainland law countries, especially Germany, and British and American law countries. The research focuses on the relevant Japanese systems. We can draw some inspiration from it and use it for reference in our country.

The fourth chapter mainly analyzes the necessity and feasibility. From the point of view of necessity, because there is a gap in the existing theory, the perfection needs the promotion of theory. It is not only from the perspective of imputation theory to re-elaborate and positioning, but also to pay attention to the introduction of the joint structure with the theory of accomplice suspension.

The fifth chapter mainly discusses the criminal gradient of the crime, which aims to analyze the treatment of the crime through the theory of interpretation. By analyzing the behavior of the accomplice and the state of the accomplice result, the degree of the accomplice relationship is analyzed, and the punishment ladder of the accomplice is constructed, which is further elaborated and analyzed.